Assimilation

[Wilber]

Okay then, fair enough. But, this brings me to the question: where do you stop? There are countless ethnic communities in Canada, and many of those have more than just headgear to identify themselves. So, why not dispense with the uniform all-together? Or, if you want to go with the WWII analogy, should the RCMP ranks be divided along ethnic/religious lines, each regiment with its own specific uniform, as was done with those Sikhs who signed up to fight fifty years ago?

No of course RCMP ranks shouldn't be divided on ethnic/religious lines, we are not even talking about uniforms, just hats. We already have regiments with their own specific dress uniforms (highland regiments, guards etc), we always have. 22e reg full dress uniform. When this subject first came up years ago, the traditionalist in me was against it but the more I think about it the traditionalist in me likes it. In fact, the idea fits quite well with our actual history. The RCMP dress uniform was modeled after that of the 19th century British military and as MD has pointed out, its head dress has change several times over it's history. There is probably no other time in history when a greater variety of people have fought under the same flag wearing different uniforms than under the Union Jack in the 19th century. It worked pretty well for them.

[g_bambino]

No of course RCMP ranks shouldn't be divided on ethnic/religious lines, we are not even talking about uniforms, just hats. We already have regiments with their own specific dress uniforms (highland regiments, guards etc), we always have. 22e reg full dress uniform. When this subject first came up years ago, the traditionalist in me was against it but the more I think about it the traditionalist in me likes it. In fact, the idea fits quite well with our actual history. The RCMP dress uniform was modeled after that of the 19th century British military and as MD has pointed out, its head dress has change several times over it's history. There is probably no other time in history when a greater variety of people have fought under the same flag wearing different uniforms than under the Union Jack in the 19th century. It worked pretty well for them.

The hat is a part of the uniform. The rules regarding it were tweaked to allow for a minority to continue its religious practices while enrolled in the institution. Why, then, should that minority be the only one that's accommodated? What of the other minorities and their special needs? If the uniform keeps getting tweaked and tweaked to fit them all in, well, there's no uniform left. Unless, the ranks are divided according to these minorities and each has a distinctive uniform to suit; you raise some pertinent examples. The point of a uniform is that everyone looks the same. That's not just for the sake of tradition, but also to serve as an identifier. A rag-tag assemblage of people each wearing whatever suits their particular heritage or religion (shall we have the Mountie burka?) may mean more ethnic communities will feel comfortable being policed by their own kind who wear the same decorations as they do, but it simultaneously undermines the solidarity and identity of the force. If the force, however, is re-organised to put all those with the same etho/religious garb into a unit, then there's some cohesion. It works for the Canadian Forces, but, does the RCMP have enough constables to allow for this. A unit of one or two people in their distinctive uniform seems a bit... lame.

Until the numbers exist to make unique regiments, what's to be done? Allow for one exception here and one there? Imagine a parade of Mounties going by in uniform, one in a turban, another with a hijab, another still in a burka, then another in a hijab, then one with a kurta, then a fez, another turban, a sari, two kimonos, a boubou, a... well, you get the point. Once you start with a turban, where does it stop?

Edited July 6, 2008 by g_bambino

[MontyBurns]

Why don't we just make the RCMP wear rainbow uniforns to show thier support for the gays? Throw out all those old red uniforms and make Canada the progressive nation of our dreams.

[Wilber]

It works for the Canadian Forces, but, does the RCMP have enough constables to allow for this.

The RCMP can't get enough constables as it is. You want to make it more difficult.

[g_bambino]

The RCMP can't get enough constables as it is. You want to make it more difficult.

I never said any such thing. I asked questions about what should be done in hypothetical, but possible, situations.

[CANADIEN]

The hat is a part of the uniform. The rules regarding it were tweaked to allow for a minority to continue its religious practices while enrolled in the institution. Why, then, should that minority be the only one that's accommodated? What of the other minorities and their special needs? If the uniform keeps getting tweaked and tweaked to fit them all in, well, there's no uniform left. Unless, the ranks are divided according to these minorities and each has a distinctive uniform to suit; you raise some pertinent examples. The point of a uniform is that everyone looks the same. That's not just for the sake of tradition, but also to serve as an identifier. A rag-tag assemblage of people each wearing whatever suits their particular heritage or religion (shall we have the Mountie burka?) may mean more ethnic communities will feel comfortable being policed by their own kind who wear the same decorations as they do, but it simultaneously undermines the solidarity and identity of the force. If the force, however, is re-organised to put all those with the same etho/religious garb into a unit, then there's some cohesion. It works for the Canadian Forces, but, does the RCMP have enough constables to allow for this. A unit of one or two people in their distinctive uniform seems a bit... lame.

Until the numbers exist to make unique regiments, what's to be done? Allow for one exception here and one there? Imagine a parade of Mounties going by in uniform, one in a turban, another with a hijab, another still in a burka, then another in a hijab, then one with a kurta, then a fez, another turban, a sari, two kimonos, a boubou, a... well, you get the point. Once you start with a turban, where does it stop?

And how many different variations from the `standard`uniform have been granted on religious grounds? Apart from the turban and (perhaps) the hijab, not one as far as I know. There is no reason to believe that there will be many others. Further, even variations on religious grounds would have to take into accounts normal requirements of a police job and security, so the burka (to take one example), would likely not be accepted.

Edited July 6, 2008 by CANADIEN

[Wilber]

I never said any such thing. I asked questions about what should be done in hypothetical, but possible, situations.

Hypothetical situations are wonderful, reality is generally more difficult.

[Wilber]

Why don't we just make the RCMP wear rainbow uniforns to show thier support for the gays? Throw out all those old red uniforms and make Canada the progressive nation of our dreams.

Or we could talk sense.

[g_bambino]

Hypothetical situations are wonderful, reality is generally more difficult.

That's why I said the hypotheticals were possible. The main question is, though: where is the line drawn? The hypotheticals were only a way to find the answer. Canadian's right about safety considerations, but, I imagine that still leaves room for plenty of other exceptions.

Edited July 7, 2008 by g_bambino

[Peter F]

g_bambino:

One in uniform, one in a turban, another with a hijab, another still in a burka, then another in a hijab, then one with a kurta, then a fez, another turban, a sari, two kimonos, a boubou, a... well, you get the point. Once you start with a turban, where does it stop?

Your hypothetical is not reflective of reality. The reality is that headress is religiously fundementally important to a Sikh. Fez's, sari's, kimono's, boubou's, stetsons etc are not religiously fundemental to anyone's religion that I can think of.

If a Sikh could get all that hair stuffed into a stetson there would be no problem. Unfortunately Stetsons just don't cut it for Sikhs. They would look really silly wearing stetsons. To deny a Sikh a position as a mountie because he would look silly wearing a stetson is to deny the man a job because of his religion.

That doesn't apply to Fez's. People who like fez's normally also cut thier hiar from time to time so's to be able to wear fez's. Thus they can cut thier hair to wear stetsons. Sikhs can't without serious religious problems.

So allowing a perfectly good RCMP officer to wear a Turban and look neat and tidy is a small thing.

I don't see how allowing that will be the slippery slope to boubou's.

[g_bambino]

g_bambino:

Your hypothetical is not reflective of reality. The reality is that headress is religiously fundementally important to a Sikh. Fez's, sari's, kimono's, boubou's, stetsons etc are not religiously fundemental to anyone's religion that I can think of.

If a Sikh could get all that hair stuffed into a stetson there would be no problem. Unfortunately Stetsons just don't cut it for Sikhs. They would look really silly wearing stetsons. To deny a Sikh a position as a mountie because he would look silly wearing a stetson is to deny the man a job because of his religion.

That doesn't apply to Fez's. People who like fez's normally also cut thier hiar from time to time so's to be able to wear fez's. Thus they can cut thier hair to wear stetsons. Sikhs can't without serious religious problems.

So allowing a perfectly good RCMP officer to wear a Turban and look neat and tidy is a small thing.

I don't see how allowing that will be the slippery slope to boubou's.

Yes, you're right, and I was aware of the differences between religious gear and ethnic costume. Still, it's a question of how far individual rights go - one could claim that the denial of their bou-bou means cultural oppression, or some such thing - and of appealing to minority communities, as Wilber brought up. I'm also still intrigued as to how Sikhs fly jets in any air force...

[GostHacked]

Again, if religion is going to dictate how you live and dress, becomming a Mountie is not going to be a good choice for you. If you hold your religious beliefs above all else, even the sanctity of the RCMP hat (which as g bambino states it IS part of the uiniform.. by stupid looking Burger King hat was part of the uniform, and you got in shit if you did not wear it... )

People want to become part of something because they beleive in it. Weather it be a religion or some national institution. If you really really want to become an RCMP officer, you will do what it takes to become one without tarnishing your own image of what the RCMP is and should be. If you want to start changing things because you think you hold your religious beleifs above all, then you really should not be applying for any job that will not allow you to be who you are.

When you become an RCMP officer, you have rules and restrictions to follow. j Dobbin brought up another point. The reason why they all wear the same uniform is for cohesion and unity among the troops. They all feel like they are part of the same team working towards the same goal. When people wear the same uniform they tend to act like the uniform and act as a team better. And this has a lot to do with dress code. When you throw a wrench into that harmonization you get a foot in the door for all other wrenches.

[guyser]

When people wear the same uniform they tend to act like the uniform and act as a team better. And this has a lot to do with dress code. When you throw a wrench into that harmonization you get a foot in the door for all other wrenches.

They were the same uniform. Did you think they dont?

[Army Guy]

They were the same uniform. Did you think they dont?

They wear a variation of the orginal uniform, but not the same uniform...which is the piont.

It may be a moot one to many here however, those that have spent a life time serving in those depts, it does matter, blame it on not excepting change, whatever, but the uniform and traditions are a major part of that organizations history, it is part of what draws new people into that group....everyone every where is drawn to groups that hold similar ideals and values they want to be part of....and they are slowly being changed for the most part by religious beliefs, or life style choices and us accommodating them.

If concessions are being made for religion, why not some other reason, such as freedom of expression, perhaps red makes my ass look big, or Camo is not in fashion, and at what piont due we draw the line....or are we saying that we can only change Canadian icons or images because of religious freedoms....

[Peter F]

They wear a variation of the orginal uniform, but not the same uniform...which is the piont.

It may be a moot one to many here however, those that have spent a life time serving in those depts, it does matter, blame it on not excepting change, whatever, but the uniform and traditions are a major part of that organizations history, it is part of what draws new people into that group....everyone every where is drawn to groups that hold similar ideals and values they want to be part of....and they are slowly being changed for the most part by religious beliefs, or life style choices and us accommodating them.

If concessions are being made for religion, why not some other reason, such as freedom of expression, perhaps red makes my ass look big, or Camo is not in fashion, and at what piont due we draw the line....or are we saying that we can only change Canadian icons or images because of religious freedoms....

Truth is, there is no limit to what and when changes to "icons" occur. The Canadian flag changed. The Mounties change the style of the dress uniform from time to time. At some point Mounties changed thier uniform so as not to wear the red serge all the time. (Now they have a yellow stripe on their non-steston hats and otherwise look pretty much like every other police officer in the country.) So does the CAF. So do police forces across the country. Cops used to wear the bobby hat at one time.

Will everyone be agreable to the change? Of course not. Must everyone be agreable? No.

It is not written in stone that Mounties must wear red tunics of a certain style. It is not written in stone that they must wear stetsons either.

The fact is concessions could be made for whatever reason the administration concerned thinks reasonable. There is nothing wrong with concessions especially when the concession is a small and unimportant thing.

So where will it all stop? I don't know, but the truth is I have yet to see a mountie wearing a turban. I have seen mounties wearing skirts though.

[JB Globe]

The Metro Toronto Police have allowed officers to wear turbans for over two decades now, and contrary to some of the absolutely ridiculous speculations here, it hasn't lead to things like officers refusing to wear blue.

Do you know what it has lead to? Devout Sikhs becoming police officers.

Stop with the sky is falling routine, no one is buying it.

You're just going to have to get over the fact that institutions aren't set in stone - they adapt to changing times. Like it was said elsewhere - at one point the mounties changed and stopped wearing red jackets, at one point they stopped all riding horses, and at one point they decided that they'd be stronger as an institution if there were no religious barriers to becoming an RCMP officer to most religious people.

Quite frankly, if you're worried about the RCMP falling apart, you should spend more of your time worrying about corruption and tasers than turbans, that seems to be a bigger issue.

Edited July 16, 2008 by JB Globe

[CANADIEN]

Again, if religion is going to dictate how you live and dress, becomming a Mountie is not going to be a good choice for you. If you hold your religious beliefs above all else, even the sanctity of the RCMP hat (which as g bambino states it IS part of the uiniform.. by stupid looking Burger King hat was part of the uniform, and you got in shit if you did not wear it... )

People want to become part of something because they beleive in it. Weather it be a religion or some national institution. If you really really want to become an RCMP officer, you will do what it takes to become one without tarnishing your own image of what the RCMP is and should be. If you want to start changing things because you think you hold your religious beleifs above all, then you really should not be applying for any job that will not allow you to be who you are.

When you become an RCMP officer, you have rules and restrictions to follow. j Dobbin brought up another point. The reason why they all wear the same uniform is for cohesion and unity among the troops. They all feel like they are part of the same team working towards the same goal. When people wear the same uniform they tend to act like the uniform and act as a team better. And this has a lot to do with dress code. When you throw a wrench into that harmonization you get a foot in the door for all other wrenches.

The sanctity of the hat? We are not talking about a human person here. And uniforms is not what make the cop, but the commitment to their duties. As for cohesion, if it is so tenuous that it can only be achieved when people look exactly the same, then people need to reconsider what they are doing in the police in the first place.

[Leafless]

The sanctity of the hat? We are not talking about a human person here. And uniforms is not what make the cop, but the commitment to their duties. As for cohesion, if it is so tenuous that it can only be achieved when people look exactly the same, then people need to reconsider what they are doing in the police in the first place.

Some people should examine their interior motives as to why they are so obsessed in breaking down a countries proud culture.

[Black Dog]

I think our culture when to shit when the Mounted Police traded their horses for Chevys.

[guyser]

I think our culture when to shit when the Mounted Police traded their horses for Chevys.

...and let in Women

...and started to wear regular caps

...and changed the stripe to yellow

...and got rid of the red for everyday wear

...and and and and.....

I guess some people just dont get it, never will apparently. But thats okay. Fun to watch them thrash and burn without a clue.

Things change, get over it.

Cue the "dysfunctional, banana republic, white superior culture, majority english," post in 5 4 3 2 1 .....

[CANADIEN]

Some people should examine their interior motives as to why they are so obsessed in breaking down a countries proud culture.

When I meet someone trying to do that, I'll ask him/her.

[CANADIEN]

The Metro Toronto Police have allowed officers to wear turbans for over two decades now, and contrary to some of the absolutely ridiculous speculations here, it hasn't lead to things like officers refusing to wear blue.

Do you know what it has lead to? Devout Sikhs becoming police officers.

Stop with the sky is falling routine, no one is buying it.

You're just going to have to get over the fact that institutions aren't set in stone - they adapt to changing times. Like it was said elsewhere - at one point the mounties changed and stopped wearing red jackets, at one point they stopped all riding horses, and at one point they decided that they'd be stronger as an institution if there were no religious barriers to becoming an RCMP officer to most religious people.

Quite frankly, if you're worried about the RCMP falling apart, you should spend more of your time worrying about corruption and tasers than turbans, that seems to be a bigger issue.

Hear Hear

[guyser]

Some people should examine their interior motives as to why they are so obsessed in breaking down a countries proud culture.

But maybe, just maybe they will have their "exterior" motives on display to facilitate your examinations.

[CANADIEN]

But maybe, just maybe they will have their "exterior" motives on display to facilitate your examinations.

Leafless has now "decided" that I am seeking to destroy English-speaking culture because I hate it. He will never get it. Whatever.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

A uniform, is a set of slothing that is alike. Changing the definition of that one word has changed many other things. The majority is being changed by the minority in this nation. We are leaving the tried and true method of of democratic rule and moving toward the tyranny of political correctness. One can say we are already there. The fact of the matter is that situational ethics have trumped the social morality of this nation. That morality was based on the majority will of the founders of this nation which was in fact based upon the morality of the religious historical heritage of the European culture which brought settlers to the new world in the first place.

We have now defined that new world, and its far different from the one in which a great many citizens were brought up in.